Hacker News Reader

Comment by irascible | Hacker News Reader

Seeing this makes me feel ashamed to be a part of the tech industry. This is why people despise the 1%. Show some taste/humility/discretion. A "service" like this is so narrowly focused on the ultra rich, that it should be marketing in high end magazines/direct outreach.. not on hacker news.

View on HN

I completely disagree. This service targets people who peg a higher value to their time than $100 / hour and/or are too busy to take on other tasks. This is valuable for anyone that runs their own business or who has an actual dollar amount pegged to their time (a large portion of HN readership), not just members of the 1%.

E.g., cancelling a doctor's appointment takes 10 minutes. Even if you bill your time out at $50 / hour, you've now saved yourself the trouble of making a random phone call for 16 bucks and remain focused on what you're actually good at.

I think, while I make a reasonable salary, I must be a bit more frugal than the large portion of HN readership in that I can always find 10 minutes of my day to cancel a doctor's appointment as opposed to paying $16 (the cost of lunch and a drink) for someone else to do it.

Perhaps I'm just not as busy as others on HN.

Someone who values their time at $100/hour, working 40 hours/week, is making over $200,000 a year. I'm not sure if that technically qualifies as the 1%, but I think it's close enough to the GP's point.

I don't know if you've ever been self-employed, but billing out 40 hours per week is very hard. $100 / hour can afford you a middle-class lifestyle (assuming 25-30 hours per week AND fully employed, more realistically you can fill 70-80% of your time).

$100 * 26 * 40 ⇒ $104k ⇒ and then slice off the employer portion for FICA and SS and you're looking at a pretty modest figure.

$200,000 isn't even 5% in SF. The fact is that there are a lot of rich people and I am sure this service provides an amazing utility for them. No need to be jealous. I am sure they don't need to advertise on HN, it's more of a look this too exists.

I'm a developer and I bill as much as $250/hour. I could totally see paying someone $100/hour to make something happen so that I could focus on a paying task.

Problem is that most tasks likely to waste my time are things that would take longer to delegate (due to detailed instructions, needing to answer questions about needs, needing to set them up with the ability to pay bills...) than to just do myself.

How is this distasteful? First off, $100 for a "we'll do whatever you want service" is not restricted to the ultra rich. But they also say they charge by the minute, not by the hour. If something only takes a few minutes, you pay ~$8.

Yeah. After you've paid your "minimum block of 10 hours" for $1000 and then you're using your 'service credit'. Or your $3000/mo subscription...

"this is so narrowly focused on the ultra rich"

So was Tesla initially. That didn't make it unworthy of tech news coverage. As this sort of technology matures and become more accessible to the general public, it has a reasonable chance of being the "next big thing". That makes its launch newsworthy to the people in the industry.

What's the technology here that needs to mature? Honest question, but it seems like just a high-end personal assistant on-demand that uses text messages to communicate. It's not obvious to me what the tech is.

Oh please, give me a break.

I'm with this guy.... get over it.

I'll have my magic+ fungineer send one over. barf.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com